Purpose: Use of the word "cure" in cancer care reflects a balance of physician and patient optimism, realism, medico-legal concerns, and even superstition. This study surveyed a group of oncology specialists regarding the frequency and determinants of using the word cure. Methods:Oncology clinicians at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (n ϭ 180) were invited to complete a survey regarding the word cure in cancer care. Participants completed a 19-question survey regarding how commonly their patients are cured, how often they use the word cure in their practice, and details about its use. Three case scenarios were presented to elicit participants' views. Results:Of the 117 participants (65%) who provided responses, 81% were hesitant to tell a patient that they are cured, and 63% would never tell a patient that they are cured. Only 7% felt that greater than 75% of their patients are, or will be, cured. The participating clinicians reported that only 34% of patients ask if they are cured. For 20-year survivors of testicular cancer, large-cell lymphoma, and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, 84%, 76%, and 48% of clinicians, respectively, believed that the patients were cured, and 35%, 43%, and 56% recommended annual oncology follow-up of the patients. Twenty-three percent of oncology clinicians believed that patients should never be discharged from the cancer center.

No abstract

89 Background: Many patients with advanced cancer at our hospital request full resuscitative efforts at the end of life. In the first in a series of quality improvement projects to improve end-of-life (EOL) care, we assessed the knowledge and attitudes of patients towards it to determine if “Allow Natural Death” (AND) orders were more acceptable than “Do Not Resuscitate” (DNR) orders. Methods: Adult patients with advanced cancer being treated at a single community hospital were invited to participate. The first 100 consenting patients were surveyed regarding their diagnosis, prognosis, and attitudes about critical care and resuscitation. They were then presented with hypothetical scenarios in which a decision on their code status had to be made if they had 1 year, 6 months or 1 month left to live. Fifty patients were given a choice between being “full code“ and “DNR”, and 50 could choose between ”full code" and “AND”. Results: Participants were equally likely to choose either of the “no code” options in all hypothetical scenarios (p > 0.54). The choice was not affected by age, sex, race, type of cancer, education, or income level. Patients who said they would want life-prolonging measures such as CPR, tracheostomies, and feeding tube placement in case of a permanent vegetative state were significantly less likely to choose “AND” than “full code” (p=0.001–0.002). A similar proportion of patients who had a living will chose “AND” and “DNR” orders instead of “full code” in all the scenarios (47–74% and 63–71%). In contrast, among patients who did not have a living will 52% chose “DNR”, while 19% opted for “AND”. More than a third (39 of 93) patients were not aware their illness was terminal. Conclusions: We hypothesized that “AND” orders may be more acceptable to patients with advanced cancer, but the wording of the “no code” order does not seem to be related to the patients’ code status decisions. The “Do not resuscitate” phrasing may be more acceptable to patients who view life-prolonging measures favorably.

Background: Many patients with advanced cancer at our hospital request full resuscitative efforts at the end of life. We assessed the knowledge and attitudes of these patients towards end-of-life (EOL) care,

Background A randomized controlled trial of routine administration of pasireotide demonstrated decreased incidence of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Recent studies have not replicated these results. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate its efficacy in this setting. Methods Prospective trials utilizing pasireotide prophylactically after pancreatectomy were reviewed. The primary outcome was clinically significant POPF. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), readmission rates, and mortality. Study heterogeneity was assessed. Results Five studies totaling 1571 patients were identified. There was no difference in age, sex, or cancer rates. Pasireotide patients had smaller pancreatic ducts ( P < .001) and softer glands ( P = .04). For all pancreatectomies, there was no difference in POPF rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.84; 95% CI 0.60-1.16, P = .29). Patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.30-1.63, P = .41) had similar rates of POPF versus pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) patients who experienced a lower incidence of POPF (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.42-0.86, P = .006). Mortality rates and LOS were similar. Readmission rates were decreased with pasireotide (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.44-0.85). Conclusions Routine administration of pasireotide did not decrease POPF rates for all pancreatectomies, but was associated with lower rates for PD, and decreased readmission rates. Further prospective, randomized studies are warranted.